Intel Arc A310E vs Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct benchmark comparisons between the Intel Arc A310E and the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile. The head-to-head benchmark field is empty, and neither part has an average benchmark score or a list of nearest rivals. Consequently, a frame-by-frame or score-by-score comparison is not possible from the recorded data. What can be compared, however, are the theoretical throughput limits, memory characteristics, and architectural capabilities encoded in the specification sheets. Those figures provide a clear picture of where each part is designed to operate.

The Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile delivers 1.856 TFLOPS. That places the discrete Arc part at roughly 1.65 times the raw floating-point throughput of the integrated solution. In FP16, the Arc A310E reaches 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) versus 3.712 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Iris Xe. The texture rate follows the same pattern: 64.00 GTexel/s for the Arc A310E against 58.00 GTexel/s for the Iris Xe. Pixel rate is closer, at 32.00 GPixel/s versus 29.00 GPixel/s, reflecting the smaller gap in ROP counts (16 versus 20). The Iris Xe actually has more ROPs, but the Arc A310E still edges ahead in pixel throughput due to its higher clock.

Memory bandwidth is the most lopsided specification. The Arc A310E uses 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, producing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. In practice, shared memory bandwidth is constrained by the host platform's memory subsystem, which is almost always far below 124.0 GB/s for a 15 W integrated part. The Arc A310E also runs its memory at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), while the Iris Xe has no dedicated memory clock at all.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Arc A310E runs at a fixed 2000 MHz base and boost. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has a 300 MHz base and a 1450 MHz boost. The discrete card holds a 550 MHz advantage at peak boost. That clock advantage compounds with the shading unit count: 768 shading units on the Arc A310E versus 640 on the Iris Xe. The Arc A310E also includes 6 ray tracing cores, a feature the Iris Xe lacks entirely.

The Arc A310E supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Iris Xe is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both parts support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc A310E uses the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, while the Iris Xe uses Generation 12.2 on Intel's 10 nm process. The Arc A310E is built on the DG2-128 chip with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The Iris Xe uses the Raptor Lake chip, for which the database lists no transistor count, die size, or density.

Power envelopes are not comparable in magnitude. The Arc A310E has a 75 W TDP with a suggested 250 W power supply, whereas the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has a 15 W TDP and no suggested power supply, as it is an integrated graphics processor. The Arc A310E is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the Iris Xe is an IGP with no slot width. Display outputs also differ: the Arc A310E provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, while the Iris Xe's outputs are portable device dependent.

The Verdict

The data indicates two different product categories. The Intel Arc A310E is a discrete, end-of-life graphics card aimed at embedded or compact systems requiring dedicated memory and consistent throughput. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile is an active integrated GPU inside Raptor Lake mobile processors, sharing system memory and operating within a 15 W envelope.

For workloads that depend on dedicated memory bandwidth, the Arc A310E is the clear choice. Its 124.0 GB/s bandwidth eliminates contention with the CPU for memory access. The Iris Xe's system dependent bandwidth means performance scales with the host laptop's RAM configuration, which the database cannot quantify. Any application sensitive to memory latency or sustained bandwidth favors the discrete card.

For compute throughput, the Arc A310E leads in every recorded metric: FP32, FP16, texture rate, and pixel rate. The Iris Xe's only structural advantages are a higher ROP count (20 versus 16) and more TMUs (40 versus 32), but those do not translate into higher pixel or texture rates because the Arc A310E's clock speed compensates. The Iris Xe does have a lower TDP at 15 W versus 75 W, which matters for battery-powered systems.

The ray tracing cores on the Arc A310E (6 total) are absent on the Iris Xe. Any DirectX 12 Ultimate workload, which requires ray tracing support, will not run at the same feature level on the Iris Xe, which tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1). The Arc A310E also has a more modern process node (6 nm TSMC versus 10 nm Intel), a larger chip (157 mm² versus unspecified), and a later release date (2024-03-31 versus 2023-01-03).

The Iris Xe's production status is active, while the Arc A310E is end-of-life. The Arc A310E also has a successor listed as Battlemage, and the Iris Xe has a successor listed as Arc Graphics-M. For new system designs, the Iris Xe remains available, but the Arc A310E is being phased out.

Architecture Differences

The Arc A310E uses the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses Generation 12.2, built on the Raptor Lake chip, and is part of the HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake) generation. These are fundamentally different designs: one is a discrete GPU architecture optimized for standalone graphics cards, the other is an integrated GPU block embedded in a mobile processor.

Process technology separates the two clearly. The Arc A310E is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The Iris Xe uses Intel's 10 nm process, and the database lists no transistor count or die size for it. The Arc A310E's transistor density is 45.9M per mm². The Iris Xe's density cannot be calculated from the recorded data.

Execution resources differ in count and ratio. The Arc A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. The Iris Xe has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. The Iris Xe allocates more units to texture and pixel work per shading unit, but the Arc A310E's higher clock speed (2000 MHz versus 1450 MHz boost) offsets that allocation.

Ray tracing is an architectural differentiator. The Arc A310E includes dedicated ray tracing hardware, enabling DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) features. The Iris Xe has no ray tracing cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so non-ray-traced Vulkan and OpenGL workloads run on both.

The Arc A310E uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. The Iris Xe uses a Ring Bus, which connects the GPU directly to the processor's internal fabric. This reflects the discrete versus integrated split: the Arc A310E communicates over a standard expansion slot, while the Iris Xe shares the CPU's memory controller.

Memory architecture is the most consequential difference. The Arc A310E has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Iris Xe uses system shared memory, with system dependent bandwidth. The Arc A310E's memory clock is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The Iris Xe's memory clock is not applicable, as it uses the host system's RAM.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every major specification field. The Arc A310E has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz. The Iris Xe has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1450 MHz. Memory size: 4 GB GDDR6 versus system shared. Memory type: GDDR6 versus system shared. Bus width: 64 bit versus system shared. Bandwidth: 124.0 GB/s versus system dependent.

Shading units: 768 versus 640. TMUs: 32 versus 40. ROPs: 16 versus 20. Ray tracing cores: 6 versus none. Pixel rate: 32.00 GPixel/s versus 29.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 64.00 GTexel/s versus 58.00 GTexel/s. FP32: 3.072 TFLOPS versus 1.856 TFLOPS. FP16: 6.144 TFLOPS versus 3.712 TFLOPS.

TDP: 75 W versus 15 W. Slot width: single-slot versus IGP. Power connectors: none versus not applicable. Suggested PSU: 250 W versus not applicable. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus Ring Bus. Display outputs: 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 versus portable device dependent.

DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1). Process node: 6 nm versus 10 nm. Foundry: TSMC versus Intel. Transistors: 7,200 million versus not listed. Die size: 157 mm² versus not listed. Transistor density: 45.9M per mm² versus not listed.

Dimensions: the Arc A310E is 168 mm long, 69 mm high, and 20 mm wide. The Iris Xe has no listed dimensions. Production status: end-of-life versus active. Release date: 2024-03-31 versus 2023-01-03. Predecessor: Xe Graphics versus not listed. Successor: Battlemage versus Arc Graphics-M. Both parts have a launch MSRP of null in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A310E delivers 3.072 TFLOPS, which is 1.856 TFLOPS higher than the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile's 1.856 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile support ray tracing?

A: No. The Iris Xe has no ray tracing cores, while the Arc A310E includes 6 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What type of memory does each GPU use?

A: The Arc A310E uses 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Iris Xe uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Arc A310E runs at a 2000 MHz boost clock. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has a 1450 MHz boost clock.

Q: Are both GPUs currently in production?

A: No. The Arc A310E is end-of-life, while the Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile is active.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Arc A310E has a 75 W TDP with a suggested 250 W power supply. The Iris Xe has a 15 W TDP and no suggested power supply, as it is an integrated GPU.

Where Each One Wins

The Arc A310E wins in raw compute, memory bandwidth, ray tracing capability, and API feature level. Its 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 output, 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 output, and 124.0 GB/s dedicated bandwidth make it suitable for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets. The 6 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support give it access to modern rendering features. The fixed 2000 MHz clock means performance does not depend on thermal headroom or host memory speed. The 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs provide multi-display connectivity.

The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile wins in power efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP is one-fifth of the Arc A310E's 75 W TDP. As an IGP on the Raptor Lake chip, it requires no additional card, power connectors, or power supply. The Ring Bus interface means no PCIe slot is needed. Its 40 TMUs and 20 ROPs outnumber the Arc A310E's 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs, giving it a slight structural advantage in texture and pixel work per clock, though lower clocks reduce that advantage in practice. The active production status and 2023 release date mean it remains available for current mobile designs.

For a compact, fanless, or battery-powered system where the GPU must share system memory, the Iris Xe is the only viable option among the two. For a system with space for a 168 mm single-slot card, a 250 W power supply, and a need for dedicated graphics memory, the Arc A310E provides more throughput in every recorded compute metric. The database shows no crossover where the Iris Xe outperforms the Arc A310E in raw speed; its wins are confined to power draw, physical integration, and availability.